Alan, >> Were you going to rebuild the tgz so that it did not have the candidate-3 >> bit in its path? What about the rename of the tag? If you change any of >> these you need to restart the vote since this email is the record of what's >> been voted on.
We intended to let people vote on the RC3, let the vote pass, and then just rename the tag and tgz to remove the "-candidate-3" from the name. The contents will stay the same. Our understanding is that if the contents stay the same, we don't need another vote. Is that right ? Thanks, Neha On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com> wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2011, at 11:51 AM, Neha Narkhede wrote: > >>>> To recap, all the artifacts that are going to be published as part of the >>>> release have to be provided for review. Artifacts cannot be published >>>> after the fact even though they may be built from a tag. >> >> So since KAFKA-133 is not yet resolved and will take quite some sbt >> specific work, we can pass on that for this release. We can start >> publishing to Maven after the next release. > > That's fine. What do others in the community think about this? Were they > counting on a release of Maven artifacts as well? If that's what is > everyone's understanding then the release should be good on this front. > > Were you going to rebuild the tgz so that it did not have the candidate-3 bit > in its path? What about the rename of the tag? If you change any of these > you need to restart the vote since this email is the record of what's been > voted on. > > Thanks for being so patent. Getting the first release out for an incubating > project always has its fits and starts. > > > > Regards, > Alan > >
